-
The proposed alternative was to perform a hardfork by increasing the block size. (BCH)
-
With the introduction of Segwit also the problem of transaction malleability got solved.
-
Segwit enables lightning network.
-
No one is forced to use segwit but there is demand for it.
1 Like
1 Another solution was to increase the block size
2 It solved the transaction malleability issue
3 Segwit allowed the development of the seconde layer protocol on which lightening is based.
4. no because segwit is a softfork
1 Like
-
To increase the block size.
-
t removed the bug that made it possible to change details in the signature, which modified the subsequent hash.
-
The lightning network is a second layer protocol, which boosts bitcoins transaction capacity by taking transactions off-chain, to settling on the blockchain when the users are ready. The Lightning network wouldn’t work without SegWit.
-
No. it is a feature that was added to Bitcoin in 2017.
1 Like
-
What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
Increasing the size to 2 mb. -
What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
It gaves more security and lower fees.
You can’t change the tx ID just with signature corrections. And the quantity of txs in a block is increased. -
How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
It supports it. -
Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
They can easily fallow the change, since it is a softfork.
1 Like
- Bitcoin Cash hard fork with larger blocks
- Malleability issues. Now signatures and scrips can be changed.
- Malleability issue removal enabled side chains and top layer solutions.
- No, it’s simply an option but there’s an trend to support both incase of future scalability issues.
.
1 Like
- An increase in the block size was proposed.
- Segwit solved the problem with transaction malleability.
- Segwit allows 2nd layer protocols to be built upon Bitcoin which included the addition of the lightening network.
4)No, it was a soft fork.
1 Like
-
The alternative to Segwit was to increase the block size.
-
Segwit solved 2 major issues with BTC. Other than the scaling issue, it also solved the issue of transaction malleability.
-
Segwit and Lightening Network are connected because Segwit solved the TX malleability issue.
-
People, wallets, and other services are NOT forced to use Segwit because it was a soft fork but integration is growing due to its benefits.
1 Like
- To allow bigger blocks, so instead of 1mB it would scale up to 2 mB
- To fix a bug called transaction mallaebility, which made it possible to temper the signature in the transaction ID.
- Segwit makes second layer possible
4.No, it is a soft fork
1 Like
- Blocksize increase
- Tx malleability
- helped make lightning network possible
- No = Soft fork
1 Like
This was to create a hard fork by increasing the blocksize from 1mb to 2mb.
It solved a long standing problem or original flaw called ‘transaction malleability’ which allows the signatures of the inputs to be changed.
It is connected by payment channels (called micropayment channels) which allow for “off the chain” low fee based transactions.
No, in fact at the point of writing my answer only roughly 40% of the transactions are writing Segwit transactions therefore the solution is backwards compatable!
1 Like
-
What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
to increase the block size from 1MB to 2MB -
What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
By separating the signature from the TX, it reduces the size of the TX, making it possible to have more TX in one block.
next to that, it allowed to modify the signature and script without affecting the content. -
How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
Segwit dupports the development of second-layer protocol. segwit makes it easier to design and less risky for the features that rely on unconfirmed TX -
Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
NO, it is not mandatory to yse segwit ( that is why btc had a harfork in btc CASH).
2 Likes
What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
SegWit introduced a new concept called “block weight”. This is a combination of block size with and without signature data, and is limited to 4MB.
What did Segwit solve more than just the escalation problem?
It allows a greater number of transactions within the 1 MB blocks, the signature of the transaction is separated from the rest of the data, allowing the use of 65% more space in each block. In addition, it prevents possible attacks of malleability on the network.
How do Segwit and the Lightning network connect?
Supporting the development of second layer protocols.
Are people, wallets, and other services required to use Segwit?
They are not required, but it is an option that they can choose.
2 Likes
1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
To increase the block size from 1MB to 2MB
2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
Tx malleability, tx fees, mining costs, tx confirmation time
3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
Segwit allows to build a second layer protocol on top of Bitcoin blockchain
4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
No
1 Like
- The main proposed alternative to Segwit was to increase the block size, which would have led to hard fork. BCH partly is the result of that hard fork.
- It also resolved a bug called transaction malleability, which allowed for anyone to make small changes in the transactions. In addition to more safety this allows the development of second layer protocols, such as the lightning network.
- The Lightning network is aiming to further increase the bitcoin transaction capacity per block by separating small and frequent transactions until they are settled. Without the malleability fix this would be much harder to make possible
- No, they are not, because the update is only a soft fork.
1 Like
It’s time for a reading assignment about Segwit. Read through the following article https://www.coindesk.com/information/what-is-segwit , and answer the following questions.
What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
- With the Bitcoin network reaching block height in between the year 2016-17, people realised that mass adoption would be difficult with full blocks reaching it limits. This would cause higher fees on the network and block times being much longer. 1 alternative option was suggesting bigger block sizes. This was taking 1mB blocks to 2mB. In relative terms this would not be a bad idea. But this would only address a short term solution. In the end with higher adoption on the network, then the situation would arise again. Where you would then again have to increase the block size data. This end the end would be a Hard Fork update.
What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
- With segwit the solution was more of a Soft Fork Update. Two things it solved where
Decreasing the Transaction Data per Transactions, and also solving Transactions Malluiability.
A transaction in a bitcoin network is made up of Input data, Output Data and a unique Tx I.D which is hashed. The segwit solution would remove the signatures data, from the Input data within the transactions and place them outside the transaction data. The signatures in the input shows the network that this is the correct person that sent the transactions or received the transactions. This data alone stores a lot of memory, so by removing it and keeping it separate from the transaction data this allows miners to allow more transactions list into the block. This also then in turns again prevents Transactions Malleability. By placing the signatures outside the Transaction data, anyone the tries to alter that information would no longer have any effect on the TX I.D.
How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
- With Segwit solving the Transaction Malleability issues. The lightning network would boost the network and allow small and frequent transactions that could be done off chain and then settled when both parties are reconnected back on to the network.
Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
- People and wallets or services are not forced to use Segwit. Most big companies are working towards adoption and the bitcoin core team list an uptake in wallets or services using the segwit update. This will help the bitcoin network overtime allowing other potential use case for bitcoin. If your not a fan of segwit and would opte for larger block size alternative you would then follow the hard fork of bitcoin and adopte Bitcoin Cash.
1 Like
- What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
The proposal was to increase the block size frrom 1MB to 2MB but this was considered a temporary solution as adoption would soon catch up with the increased size. It also meant that confirmations times would be greater and fees would be higher - What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
It solved the Transaction malleability issue. Originally a transaction would include both inputs and outputs. The inputs also included the signatures which were generally large. If someone wanted to they could alter the TxHash by making a minor change to the signature. This would result in a different hash value thereby increasing the risk that bad actors could claim transactions had not been sent - How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
By solving the transaction malleability issue it allows overlays on the Bitcoin network to provide other services such as Lightning. This will provide an ability to remove small transactions off chain and increase throughput
4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
Segmit protocol is not mandatory, in fact, Bitcoin Cash was a hard fork created because some people were opposed to it. However, in time the protocol will be widely available as it gets adopted by wallets etc
- What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
Hard forking the Bitcoin network and changing the BTC source code, to accept and work with bigger sized blocks than 1MB.
- What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
Transaction malleability. Before segwit, third parties could manipulate small details in the way the signatures are exactly expressed inside an UTXO. This very minor change would then lead to the same transaction getting (hashing) a new transaction ID - while the old transaction would seemingly disappear (old txid not found anymore). This hindered development (esp. second layer and smart contract integration) and constituted a security risk for network users, especially from fraud.
- How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
Segwit made second layer solutions like the lightning network possible, since txids and their resulting hashes were now unchangeable and therefore stable and dependable.
- Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
No, segwit was a soft fork and “legacy” addresses and wallets still work.
-
What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
Increasing block size -
What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
Transaction ID Malleability -
How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
Segwit prevent malleability enable pre-agree transaction ID to remain constant which used by lighting network -
Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
No. It’s a soft fork
- Increasing the blockchain size.
- full block and signatures malleability.
- Segwit supports a second layer protocol called the lightning network. This is due to the Segwit development which solve the signature malleability.
- No, it is an optional service. Its also a soft fork.
Increasing the block size like that in bitcoin cash.
It solve the problem of tx id malleability and this will allow a second layer on bitcoin as smart contracts and lightning network.
It separated the signatures so the tx id won’t be affected if anyone changed the signature.
No, but as more people use SegWit the block will accept more txs and the fees will decrease.